BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M.

,SOUTH EAST
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA AND OTHERS ……ACCUSED

INDEX
S.No. Particulars Pages C.Fee
1. Memo of Parties
2. Complaint U/s 200 Cr.P.C.
Along with Application
U/s 156(3) With affidavits
3. List of Witnesses.
4. List of Documents
along with documents.
6. Vakalatnama
FILED BY

COMPLAINANT
NEW DELHI

DATED: THROUGH

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi
 BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED

U/S: 200 Cr.P.C.

P.S. GOVINDPURI
MEMO OF PARTIES
NARESH KUMAR
S/O SH. SHRICHAND R/O
RZ-9/19 STREET 11,
TUGHLAKABAD
EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110044 ……COMPLAINANT

Versus

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA

S/O SH. RAM NAYAN MAURYA
R/O RZ-261/19, TUGHLAKABAD
EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110044 …..ACCUSED
FILED BY

COMPLAINANT
NEW DELHI

DATED: THROUGH

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi
 BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M.,SOUTH EAST
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR
S/O SH. SHRICHAND R/O
RZ-9/19 STREET 11,
TUGHLAKABAD
EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110044 ……COMPLAINANT

Versus

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA

S/O SH. RAM NAYAN MAURYA
R/O RZ-261/19, TUGHLAKABAD
EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110044 ……..ACCUSED

U/S. 200 Cr.P.C.

P.S. GOVINDPURI

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 200 OF Cr.P.C FOR THE

OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323/452/506 OF
IPC AGAISNT THE ACCUSED.

Most respectfully Showeth:

1. That the complainant is a peace loving and law-abiding citizen of
India and having full faith on the law of the land.
2. That the complainant has been serving the society and the region
as the RWA (Resident Welfare Association) President and in the
corporation elections of December 2022 all the RWA members
and Some residents of the area made the complainant contest the
councilor election as an independent candidate. In this election,
the Vice President of RWA Shri Nanak Singh has given the
complainant his Office RZ-261A/4, Street No-19 free of cost for
election office. Apart from this, Nanak Singh also became the
election agent of the complainant.
3. That the accused Mr. Uday Pratap Maurya, who calls himself a
lawyer, runs the office of legal documentation adjacent to the
above said office of the complainant.
4. That on 29.11.2022, between 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM, Uday
Pratap Maurya, his elder son Anand Pratap Maurya, his younger
son who runs the office of Uday Pratap Maurya and one of his
Neighbors Sharma who runs an electrical shop in this complex
came in front of the Complainant’s office and started breaking
and removing the flags (printed with cylinder logo) of
INDEPENDENT PARTY and started putting the flags of AAM
AADMI PARTY.
5. That after seeing the above said incident the nephew of the
Complainant Mr. Abhishek S/O Mr. Suresh Kumar, R/O S-23
B7-A Karotiya Camp, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019,
Aged about 20 years, who was sitting in the office of the
complainant requested all of the above said persons to let the
complainant come and then let the matter be discussed but on
hearing this all the four people forcefully entered inside the office
of the complainant and started abusing and began to fight with
Mr. Abhishek Kumar also started hitting him and dragged him to
the stairs of the complex and then Mr. Uday Pratap Sharma
started shouting by saying “Na toh tumhari koi khud ki jagah hai
aur na koi Office, tumhe Elections Ladne ka bohut shauk hai na?
 ab mujhse case ladna, Aise aise case banaunga na ki tumhari puri
zindagi case ladne mein nikal jayegi. Tumhari puri zindagi
barbad na kardi toh mera naam bhi Adv. Uday Pratap Maurya
Nahi.”
6. That at the time of the above said incident the Complainant was
not present in the office and had left for his election campaigning.
7. That after a few minutes Accused Uday Pratap Maurya called 10-
15 more unknown people and with the intention of killing Mr.
Abhishek, Uday Pratap Maury pushed him down the stairs of the
complex as a result of falling down Mr. Abhishek fainted on the
spot and Uday Pratap Maurya himself lost his balance from the
stairs of the complex and fell on his knee from the stairs, due to
which he got injured on his knee.
8. That one Mr. Krishanu Das was sitting in the office with Mr.
Abhishek, told the whole Incident to the Complainant and to the
Police.
9. That the complainant entered the street only after all this
happened, by then people had taken Mr. Abhishek to the trauma
center in an unconscious state. The MLC report of the nephew
was also prepared by the doctors there. The MLC has also been
attached herewith as ANNEXURE-A.
10. That When the Complainant reached his office, he then saw that
these four men and the other 10-15 strangers called by Uday
Maurya were abusing and shouting and as soon as the
complainant reached there, all of them started pushing and
shoving him and even threatened to kill him.
11. That the Complainant on the spot made an emergency call to the
police on 112 around 11:00 am. But received No Reply. Due to
the time limit the Complainant had to leave for the election
campaigning. Even during the campaign, the complainant made
3-4 calls between 11:00 am to 1:00 pm and got his complaint
reminded on 112. It was during the campaign that the Additional
SHO and ACP came there and took the complaint in writing in
the form of a statement. But till date no information was given to
 the complainant by the police for the complaint and statement,
nor was any FIR registered.
12. That Due to ill health of Mr. Abhishek the nephew of the
complainant, the wife of the complainant and the complainant
himself and the fear of danger on the life of above said family
members of the Complainant, the Complainant could not make
his FIR registered. The health of everyone in the family is better
than before.
13. That Now, Uday Pratap Maurya, his elder son Anand Pratap
Maurya, younger son who handles his office, one of his neighbors
Sharma ji (electrical shop owner) and 10-15 unknown people
who were called by Uday Maurya over phone who While
carrying out the murderous attack on Mr. Abhishek the nephew
by entering the office, he had threatened to kill the Complainant
along with his family members. As a result the complainant wants
to register an FIR on all of these persons.
14. That all the accused persons are threatening the complainant and
his family that they will kill his family and also, they are mentally
torturing the complainant and his family.
15. That the complainant disturbed and disappointed by the act of the
accused persons, thus complainant forwarded his complaint to the
SHO Govind Puri, Police Station and higher authorities for their
redressal on 07.01.23 CC No. 300014/23 which has given to the
complainant after receiving on 08.01.23 and till now no action
has been taken. The copy of the complaint has been attached
herewith as ANNEXURE B.
16. That on 21.04.23, the Complainant again sent a copy of
complainant’s letter to Commissioner of Police, Delhi and DCP,
Delhi Police as a reminder but till now no help has been granted
to the Complainant. The copy of the above said complaint has
been annexed hereto as “Annexure C (Colly). But despite these
efforts still no action has been taken by the police.
17. That the Complainant has been in contact with the concerned
Police Officials since 28.11.22 and the Police officials had been
pressurizing the complainant to compromise but the complainant
always refused as his nephew was grievously Injured by Uday
Pratap Maurya and his Companions and the same persons had
also been misbehaving with the Complainant but the Police
officials did not inquired on the Complainant’s Complaint which
they (police Officials) written by themselves nor did the
Complainant received any Information regarding the same.

18. That recently the complainant had received more threats from the
accused persons. the accused persons abused complainant with
all types of filthy words again and extend threats to complainant
life and his family and further intimidated to the “complainant to
face the dire consequences if he tries to initiate any legal action
against him”.

19. That the cause of action has arisen within the territorial
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court as the accused had committed
the criminal acts and further abused the complainant, Injured his
Nephew and his family at Tughalakabad Extension New Delhi
and committed the offence U/S 323/452/506 of IPC within the
jurisdiction of P.S. Govind Puri. Hence this Hon’ble court is
competent to entertain the present complaint, take cognizance;
issue summons the accused and sentenced the accused as per the
provisions of law.

Prayer:
In view of the Above-Mentioned facts and circumstances, it is most
respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased
to:
A. Take cognizance, issue process, summons the accused persons and
initiate trial and sentence the accused in accordance with the law;
and

B. Pass such any other or further order(s) in the facts and circumstance
of the case as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.

COMPLAINANT
NEW DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi

BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST,

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT
 VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED

LIST OF WITNESSES
1. Complainant himself
2. Mr. Abhishek S/O Mr. Suresh Kumar, R/O S-23 B7-A
Karotiya Camp, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019.
3. Concerned Police officer of P.S. Govind Puri.
4. Mr Krishanu Das
5. Any other person/s with the permission of this Hon’ble
Court.

FILED BY:

Complainant
NEW DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi

BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST,

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No.________/2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT
VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

1. MLC of Mr. Abhishek, nephew of the Complainant.

2. Photocopy of complainant’s letter Dated 07.01.23
3. Photocopy of the letter dated 21.04.23 to Commissioner of Police,
Delhi and DCP, Delhi Police, SHO PS Govind Puri.
4. Any other document with the prior permission of this Hon’ble Court.

FILED BY:

COMPLAINANT
NEW DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi

BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT
 VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED

P.S. GOVIND PURI

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 156(3) OF Cr.P.C. SEEKING

DIRECTIONS TO THE CONCERNED POLICE OFFICIALS TO
REGISTER AN FIR AND INVSTIGATE THE MATTER AGAINST
THE ACCUSED PERSONS UNDER SECTIONS 323/452/506 IPC.

Sir,
It is most respectfully submitted as under:
1. That the applicant has filed the accompanying complaint u/s 200 of
CR.P.C. for the offences committed by the accused persons within
the jurisdiction of P.S. Govind Puri, New Delhi.

2. That the contents of the complaint are not being repeated herein for
the sake of brevity and same may kindly be read as part and parcel
of this application.

3. That the complainant had after the incidence, given the information
to the police official of P.S. Govind puri, Commissioner of Police,
Delhi and DCP, Delhi Police but till date no action has been taken
against accused persons.

4. That the present matters require immediate intervention of this

Hon’ble Court for the registration of an FIR as:-

GROUNDS:-

A. That offences of serious nature has committed by the Accused.

That it is mandatory for the police officials to record the
 information given to them U/S 154(1) Cr.P.C., in relation of
offence punishable U/S 323/452/506 IPC.

B. That to trace the accused person who is beyond the reach of the
complainant which is necessary to prove the motive of the
accused.

C. That it is settled law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in SURESH CHAND JAIN VS STATE, S.C, Apex court
364,2001 and in MADHUBALA VS STATE S,C 1997that
when a verbal or written complaint disclose a cognizable
offence, the police officials are duty bound to register the case
and investigate the matter thereafter. Despite of the aforesaid
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court the police officials
did not take any action against the accused person reason best
known to them. It was also cited in the aforesaid judgments that
when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, the Ld.
Magistrate is empowered to send the same to the concerned
police station with the direction to register the case and
investigates the same.

D. That it was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in

Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. V/s State reported as 2001 (4)
A.D. Delhi 625 that the direction for registration of FIR under
section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. may be ordered when allegation are
serious in nature, evidence are beyond the reach of the
complainant, custodial investigation is necessary for recovery
or discovery of facts.
E. That after seeing the demeanor of the police officers of P.S.
Govind Puri who are reluctant in registering the FIR even
though cognizable offences of serious nature have taken place.
To bring out the veracity of the matter and to bring the guilt of
the accused persons, it is paramount to register the FIR and also
 the investigation shall be done under the supervision of the
Hon’ble court as mention in the landmark judgment of SAKIRI
VASU VERSUS STATE OF U.P AND OTHERS, AIR 2008
SC 907 (The Magistrate can also under the same provision
monitor the investigation to ensure a proper investigation).
F. That In the Matter of Lalita Kumari vs Govt. of U.P. & Ors. WP
(CRIMINAL) No. 68 of 2008 Supreme Court of India
laid down very important directions which are as under;

1. Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the

Code, if the information discloses commission of a
cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is
permissible in such a situation.

2. If the information received does not disclose a cognizable

offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a
preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain
whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.

3. If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable

offence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where
preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of
the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first
informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must
disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not
proceeding further.

4. The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering

offence if cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be
taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if
information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.

G. The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the

veracity or otherwise of the information received but only
 to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable
offence.

H. That further delay by recording pre-summoning evidence may

affect the gravity of the offences as the accused person may
commit more offences against the complainant and the life of
the complainant and his family members are also at risk from
the hands of accused person and that may hamper the evidences.

I. That the offence/incidence is cognizable and this court is

competent to direct the concern police station for registration of
an FIR and further investigation of the matter in the interest of
justice.

J. That this Hon’ble Court is empowered u/s 156 (3) CrPC to order
police to register an FIR as per the judgments of Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India.

PRAYER

In view of the above facts and circumstances it is, therefore, most

respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

1. Direct the S.H.O. of the concerned police station to register an FIR

against the accused person and they be dealt in accordance with
law; and

2. Pass such order, further orders in the facts and circumstances of the
case as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.

APPLICANT
NEW DELHI
DATED: Through

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH

LAKSHAY PANCHAL
DEEPALI
(Advocates)
614, Lawyers Chamber
Saket Court Complex, New Delhi

BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST,

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.

COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED

P.S. GOVIND PURI
 AFFIDAVIT
I, Naresh Kumar aged about years S/O Sh. Shrichand R/O rz-9/19
Street 11, Tughlakabad Extension, New Delhi-110044. do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1. That the accompanying complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. and

application U/S 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been drafted by my counsel,
under my instructions and the same has been read over to me in
vernacular.
2. That I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the
case and fully competent to swear this affidavit.
3. That the contents of accompanying complaint have not been
repeated herein for the sake of brevity and the same may be read as
part and parcel of this affidavit.

Deponent
Verification:
Verified at New Delhi on this……..of….. May, 2023 that the contents of
the affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom.

Deponent

BEFORE THE COURT OF HON’BLE C.M.M., SOUTH EAST,

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
COMPLAINT CASE No. ________/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARESH KUMAR ………COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
UDAY PRATAP MAURYA ……ACCUSED
P.S. GOVIND PURI

Affidavit of Compliance of Section 156(2) Cr. P.C.

I, Naresh Kumar aged about years S/O Sh. Shrichand R/O rz-9/19
Street 11, Tughlakabad Extension, New Delhi-110044. do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That the Deponent is the complainant in the above said matter and
well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and
fully competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the Deponent has already complied with the provisions of
Section 156(2) Cr.P.C. as he has filed the complaint to DCP, Delhi
Police and CP, Delhi Police vide his complaint Dt. 07.01.23 &
21.04.23.
3. That the contents of the affidavit are true and correct to best of my
knowledge and nothing has been concealed thereof.

Deponent
Verification:
Verified at New Delhi on this……..of….. May 2023 that the contents of
the affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom.

Deponent